tv U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN September 25, 2012 1:00pm-5:00pm EDT
i ask you -- we will give you the information. we know who is doing this and who is good at this, and we have tried really hard, and it is one of the few areas where we have not gotten as much financial support as i hoped we would. i'm telling you, as is a very big deal and i am very grateful that the united states has such a big -- [applause] i would like to invite to the stage mary robinson, a former president of ireland, as well as the former prime minister of norway -- >> we are breaking away from this portion.
a reminder, you can see the president's comments on c- span.org. we will be back with mitt romney and paul ryan coming up live this afternoon at 3:00 p.m. eastern. >> the first debate between mitt romney and president barack obama is next wednesday, october 3. jim lehrer will moderate at the university of denver. watch and engage. followed by the domestic policy debate at 9:00. after the debate, your questions and comments. follow live coverage on c-span, c-span radio, and online at c- span.org. >> now, a discussion on the jewish vote and the upcoming presidential election. speakers are the former new york city mayor, ed koch, and current
new york congressman, bob turner, who holds the seat formerly held by anthony wiener. this was part of an event from last weekend in new york city at the fordham university law school. >> we are here once again for the wine institute in connection with this conference dedicated to examining the 2012 presidential election and the way it is being shapedy the memory of the holocaust and politics there. we could find no two more interesting people to discuss this topic for many reasons. first, the former three term mayor of new york city, ed koch. [applause] people forget, i do not, but people forget that he started out as a congressman. the discussion we are talking about is not merely about his
days as mayor, but that he too has run for congress and knows what that means in washington. i think that in his most recent vintage, you can think of him as a king maker, in fighting the jewish vote. many people think of him as a king make -- kingmaker, barometer for where the jewish vote is headed. to some degree, our next guest, congressman bob turner might say that the support the cut -- the mayor had given to you was helpful. >> it was beyond helpful, it was critical. >> let's go back, kingmaker. [laughter] bob turner is a brooklyn congressman in his first term.
a decent and likable man, very much involved in his first term on the foreign relations homeland security is committee. obviously, you decided to get your hands dirty. we are happy to have you here. it is important to remember -- yes, let's have some quick applause for bob turner. you know why? he may one day become a kingmaker himself. what we have to point out in acknowledging bob turner postelection -- bob turner's election is that it required the mayor to cross party lines. mayor koch, this is not the first time.
it does not exactly go to the other boroughs, quite right. thank you for correcting me. of course, he voted for george bush in the second election and, famously, he said he did not agree with a single domestic issue from george bush, with the exception of the fact he is handling terrorism in an important way. >> next all others. in the case of the movement of support for bob turner, you did an event shortly thereafter were you said they wanted to send a message to president obama that you did not think he was sufficiently handling his foreign policy correctly with respect to israel. >> with respect to the jewish
community. >> you said you eventually met with president obama and he solicited my support and i decided to support him again. i want to step in here because it was apparently just last week they you delivered a speech at a synagogue for rashashana. >> i continued the discussion in the new york post. >> you were again, critical, of the obama administration. >> i have never seen nor perfect candidate and i was not perfect. i will always speak out, but if you read the article today and my other utterances, it has always been stated that i am still on the obama train. i will explain why. >> we would definitely like you
to do that. if you address the question of the red line. tell us what you said last week. >> i was incensed, as i believe every american was, what occurred in both egypt and libya. in egypt, the embassy was overrun with cops. they did not ran away -- run away. the libyan cops ran away, didn't protect the embassy and worst of all, the ambassador was killed, so to speak. i don't know exactly how. along with three other consulate personnel.
i did not believe the american response was adequate. the american embassy in egypt initially put out a statement that was denunciatory of the video that some muslims were saying was the reason for the attack. it was not sufficiently denunciatory of the egyptian government, in my judgment. hillary put out a magnificent statement that follows the white house, repudiating the
american embassy statement and making a statement calling the egyptian government to task. in libya, we were more conciliatory because the libyan president denounced the attack. but that is not adequate. if they can't control the cops and military, it is not a government. we should be denunciatory. i doubt there is a single country in the world left in civilization that would not have called back its ambassador. and certainly cut off, or put in terms that relates to the 2 billion that egypt receives from the united states, i am sure libya receives money. it was even greater because the
american ambassador -- i am supportive of the arab spring. the times and elsewhere, i said to myself, they are not great people. but they are people that surely will turn out nice to us. it doesn't make any sense. >> the events of the last week, the embassy attacks, it will result in a further ongoing shift of jewish americans
changing -- >> i think there is a little more to follow. the shift in special elections indicated deep distrust of this administration. that was clear. what the administration said, you heard what the state said. the message was sent loud and clear. for a while, i think it was always together. we have heard the state department say that they have taken every reasonable step.
we have heard the quote from the ambassador suggesting he was comfortable and these people love me. it's not true. he issued a statement saying he is very concerned about his own safety. again, we have an information gap. that is coming home to roost. this will build. >> today's new york times, the interview with the new egyptian president adds to all this. if the united states wants to have good relations with the arab world and with egypt, it has to jettison a special
relationship with israel. when the united states took on the role of mediators between israel and egypt, it was understood that there is not only a special relationship, but there is an ally in the united states. when is it entered that position, the palestinians still want the united states as we know, no other country can get israel to ultimately allowed a second state or a palestinian state next to israel. it means the security the united states would provide as many people think it wouldn't because if you look at the
palestinian situation today, i am for a two-state solution. will it happen in my lifetime? no. do the israelis want it? yes. do the palestinians? i don't think so. they have not been for more than a year. and the reason i believe that is because they think that they can wait out the western world and ultimately have a single statement to overwhelm the israelis. that is why if you hand over palestinian authority -- he has an honorific name i was looking for. if you ask him, do you accept the jewish state? not just the state of israel, but israel as a jewish state,
he says, don't ask me, you don't have to do that. that is the heart of this. if you have to states, one as muslim and one is jewish. it doesn't mean that christians can't live in the muslim state. or will they have fled because of their muslim neighbors? they are less than 2% living on the west bank. they had a christian majority. many of them have come to the united states. the majority government on the west bank, the sector now called israel will have the right of return.
that will simply overwhelm the jewish state and it will not happen. it will not happen. netanyahu has said that he believes in the two-state solution. i do not think that the arab leadership believes it. and certainly on the strip, every jew that enters the palestinian mandate after 1917 must be expelled. they have also declined to get up violence -- give up violence. it's a facade, a fake. >> congressman, given what you
heard the mayor say, to some degree, do you agree with him? you think president obama is listening to what the mayor said? politics of the mid-east? do you remember his speech in cairo, he never went to jerusalem after that. it was very much apologetic. there were these ongoing messages to iran where the president was welcoming the new year for the iranian people. and it doesn't appear that the united states has enhanced their credibility after these conciliatory gestures.
you heard the mayor speak so grimly of what he thinks the future will hold. >> we have not only a misreading -- to four years ago, this administration set out to reset relationships. doing a good deal of personal diplomacy, all of you can win over hearts and minds of increasingly radicalized islamic worlds. the results of this in a short time, we see a reluctance to understand what is really happnening to get -- happening
to get back on policy. not only are we too often on the wrong side of this arab spring, we fail to recognize the momentum and the danger it's causing. we haven't gotten into the iranian thing. i think this administration has dropped the ball. and they are capable of changing their mind to put this right. >> will the mindset and tactics in handling the middle east, does it change the nature of the electorate in terms of how they will vote? historically, it was always said that they never vote their
economic interests. they became professionals, and even still promoted the democratic party even if they could have been republicans economically. this democratic party has nothing to worry about because they won't move off of that no matter how much wealth they might achieve. it is very much with israel in mind. is that still true? >> i am not sure, i think people on this issue of israel and the voting pattern of jews -- that is my recollection. it's in that area. young jews, we have forgotten
when the holocaust came, the children that were at the 500,000 children killed during the holocaust. historically, jews have an enormous social conscience which is reflected in the biblical package -- addage. why do they repeat the word justice twice? justice not only for jews, but for all the people. i believe that. >> you believe they have internalized that? >> absolutely. i believe that when jews vote democratic as they do overwhelmingly and as i do
overwhelmingly, it is because of social conscience. there are lots of things that are important. among them are social security, medicare, medicaid, abortion, food stamps, taxing progressively the wealthy. and foreign affairs, those are the partnerships, so to speak. and on the issue of domestic matters, i don't know how you can be against the platform of the democratic party on those issues. something that bob and i read to, we will get into that part of the race or not. so when i announced what i was
going to take on the issue of sending a message here, there are only two special elections and the whole country. my political friends said, you are crazy. i announce that i would do what i could to make this a referendum, sending a message to the president. i want him to know that i disagree with his decisions as they relate to a number of issues in the jewish community. >> q frame bidder earlier as respecting the jewish community. -- you framed it earlier as respecting the jewish community. >> in any event, i said i was going to lead that challenge. i got a call from the democratic candidate who i knew at the time. i had worked with them and we
had a good relationship. he was screaming at me on the telephone, which i can understand. i said, david, this is not personal. not that it is going to help. he said, i can be the message. i said, you can be the message that we send another jewish democrat to washington? that is not the message. the messages that we send a republican.
rob turner said, let's talk about this and see if we can come to an agreement. i said, please come up. he was highly intelligent. i said, look. i can only do this with you on the following basis. i am sending a message to the president of my party and you have to be sending a message to the national leadership of your party that we don't agree on privatizing medicare and social
security, turning medicaid into a block grant. i don't care about your other issues, but on those, we have to have an agreement. he said we agree on that. we don't have to agree on every aspect of that, but i wanted that made clear. we agree that that was the key. he kept his word, i kept my word. he won with an eight point margin. >> roughly. >> unheard of. 300,000 jews live in that area. the congressional district did not go democratic. i got a call a couple weeks later from the chief of staff, a wonderful guy. the brother of the former mayor of chicago. the grandson. he said, i know you're meeting with the delegates at the second street library.
i said, sure, who wouldn't? he said, half an hour early. i came half an hour early. the president came man, i want to give you all the details, but he said to me, i don't understand why you are upset. i am really supportive. he is an affable, charming guy. i like him. i like him then, i like him now. we spoke for 20 minutes and he said, your turn. i had 10 minutes. i would not have been so critical of you if you have
said that we can go back to the '67 lines even though they are indefensible and i don't agree with you. have you also make demands upon hamas, you didn't. israel doesn't have to deal with them until they give up their charter. did he die? i said, no, mr. president, he did not. he convinced me and i was molded over in the next couple of days. i will not stretch this out and keep them wondering. i do not believe in that.
do it now. i called up the people infovled. -- involved. i agreed, they said we could go to florida. i will go anywhere you want me to go. i am not sure i can do that anymore because of my physical condition. rowboat calls, videos, what ever. indeed, hospitalization. [indiscernible] so that is where we are. >> congressman, within the last year or so, i did an event, very similar. also a heavily jewish audience. it was packed. i did not know there were this many jewish republicans.
and in this discussion, one of the things they said is, very surprising to me that more jewish-american don't support republican candidates. precisely because of the number of issues important to the jewish community. he was genuinely baffled and said, i don't see how anyone can think that the democratic party is a superior defender of israel. is that another reason why this election, there might be more movement than you would have otherwise expected? >> this is a tough one to figure out. eric cantor called me a week
after the election and said this is the first time a republican has won the jewish vote. maybe something is happening. i got some interesting advice. i hadn't been in politics very long. if you have two jews, you have three opinions. [laughter] so that, i found, was truism. as we look at the changing patterns, the wisest person i know in politics said that the jewish vote is such that the conservative, you can get an appeal to. make sure you spell out your social agenda.
the secular jewish vote, very legitimate socialism. what may get them back in the tent is israel. 20% would be enough to win the election. the district is 33% jewish, perhaps more. the jewish vote, which historically had been a block is not. >> could that be mirrored in other districts? i think i had mentioned to you but did not tell the audience that we did another event. shortly after your election, he
said that was a freak accident and had nothing to do with the obama administration's treatment of israel. it had everything to do with the increasing conservatives -- >> she will say things like that. >> the jews that vote in your district are naturally more religious and conservative. it is a common thread. >> this is the part of the entire american electorate. whether it is virginia or whatever. i think as the election becomes more focused, the divide will be more pronounced. >> it is a little confusing thinking about the 2012 race, israel is in your sight lines. on one hand you have clearly at icy relationship between the prime minister of israel and the president of the united states.
it is not a good feeling. the defense minister says that when it comes to military spending, the iron dome defense system, remember this is not the first time that egyptians ransacked an embassy. they ransacked the israeli embassy eight months ago. this is the second time in one year that in egypt embassy is fair game. the prime minister called obama immediately and obama got on of holland -- the phone and said, do something about this. protect these people. she will routinely say that this is the best president in
american history in terms of support for israel. in terms of military spending, we have never got more support. but if you ask people on the street, they have a very different reading of the feelings of obama to israel. >> i had taken the position up until recently that israel should not be an issue in the race because the parties are both supportive of israel. it should relate to the domestic issues where there is clear cleavage between the two. that has been my position. i don't think that anyone can rightly say that president obama is the best president.
i think reagan was. i think second bush was. but he's acceptable in my judgment. i hope to change him. i talk to people, they know my views. i am not reluctant. i tell them exactly what i think. and i have never believed in the conversations because they always appeared interesting. maybe i am just somebody else, but they will appear. we occasionally make errors. i am not bad at this stuff. i have made very clear where i
am. there is further support of israel, there was a magnificent speech at the un in support of israel. he kept the palestinian authority from getting independent states opposed by the un. he has done wonderful things and i give him the credit for it. it gave him his political start. i understand that in chicago. i've believe what i am talking about is doable. all this could be wiped out in terms of bitterness and so forth if the president would
just say, an attack by iraq on israel will be received by the united states as an attack upon the united states. and we will respond militarily. i think you can say that about saudi arabia, too. when i made my statement, you should make people turn to vote. iran wants to destroy saudi arabia, too. >> we will get to iran in a moment, but let's pick up a little of that. it is confusing if you watch both conventions and you listen to people for both parties. one will always claimed that they are superior to the other in their historic support of israel.
you have people telling us that republicans are stronger. i forgot these efforts to thwart the u.s. recognition of statehood. that is something obama has not received enough credit for. within a year, we have both a jewish congresspersons, one republican and one democrat saying opposite things. your party would do better in the white house for israel. >> i certainly believe so. it is a very critical period. small things can mean an awful lot when the president has not been to israel, snubs the prime minister, has made outrageous claims. these have consequences. i think some of the arab states right now -- these are big blunders. >> you mean the boldest of the
arab states? >> that daylight between israel and the united states. this is an administration of a great deal of rhetoric. let's look to the actions. >> that is an interesting point, congressman. there are people that say, it doesn't matter if there are nice photo ops. but does it matter what president obama is eating in jerusalem? >> it does matter. >> would you measure military
support with the diplomatic aid? he may not love is real. >> i am not asking obama if he loves it, if he believes it is in the best interests of the united states to support that relationship that every president has done. does he believe in order to satisfy the muslim world, that somehow or another, he has to separate from israel. it is absolutely true. by the way, the president's people say that there was never a formal request for a meeting. i believe them. i believe they are honorable
people. not having that meeting is unfair. my contact said that the israeli the first sent the request had to walk that statement back. i accept it as true because people that told me this are honorable people. i agree with bob that the most important saying is not to give the world the idea that if they keep attacking the united states, we will somehow throw israel under the bus in order to have a better relationship with them. every time we do something that
this lodge's the space between them. it is in our interest to make sure that iran -- >> we can, but -- >> iran is an enemy of both the united states and isra. can you count on pakistan? can you count on afghanistan when the chips are down? they hate us. they are killing us. we should be out of afghanistan tonight. but we are there with our young men are dying. i read in the times that the reason we don't fix the capital
is that we don't have any money, and we jus tspent money -- just spent money completing the american embassy in iraq. >> congressman, you were seated when netanyahu added congress a number of months ago. what we all remember about that day is that there were three standing ovations for an israeli prime minister. many people thought it was incredibly presumptuous. that they think he should be
addressing the house of congress. and that he presented this later -- rescinded this later that the ovations were paid for. >> an outrage. tom freedman said that for palestinians to engage in the same and throw stones at israeli soldiers was in the times. i want to tell you. i was in israel in 1990, 1991 when they said people are not coming -- could you come, maybe that would encourage americans to resume tourism? i met with teddy who is a great friend. >> he was the mayor of jerusalem at that point.
>> he said, to show you the archaeological museum that we just found. he did not tell me there was a dental strike. we're going to the old city and he had no security. it was amazing. i had five cops. the mayor had nobody that protected him and there were 25 reporters. they were hit on the head, bleeding, and ultimately went to the hospital. i had stitches in my head, so i am telling you that i would be
blind. tom freedman who has never apologized for it urged threateg them with life and limb. assailing those israeli soldiers for not being kinder. >> you no doubt remember that day. is the support of israel genuine in the house of representatives? is there a strategic interest in the united states to maintain those strong relationships? >> the relationship goes from strategy to culture to a commonality of interests. it is both sides of the aisle. >> one of your early days in congress, it was reported as a
special moment to see that many standing ovations. you would have stood. >> absolutely. >> during the campaign, i would have been jumping up and down. [laughter] >> why do you think that the jewish electorate has changed at all in recent times during the obama administration? do you think that the support among non-jews has changed in any way for their support of israel? >> with respect to the obama us support of the jewish community? i think it went down to a low ultimately after the election. it rose over 60% now. with respect to the american
people, it's very interesting. democrats, at one point, not too long ago, only 48% of democrats were supportive of israel. 85% of republicans were supportive. >> it has gone up, democrats. >> you are saying that support among republicans is higher? >> it has always been higher. we are talking among the -- >> among the general population. the percentage is higher among republicans. that is a nice lead in for you. >> i see a lot of forces at play right now. the leadership of the democratic party is taking a
harder tone. a pro-palestinian platform, among other things. there is a moderate democratic vote and there are liberals and who need a place to go. you know, the republicans right now are not as low coming to a large group -- welcoming to a large group. also within the republican party, we have the party on the far right with problems. dealing with -- >> you don't go bowling with
them. why do you suppose the mayor -- a higher percentage of republicans than democrats among non-jews? why do you suppose that is true? >> we see a commonality of interests of culture and strategy. we, republicans, have an ability to look at reality. this islamic revolution is serious business. >> they want to kill us, too
often, in the house. or in committees. democrats >> talk about you have the presbyterians, the baptists, we have different forces at work. we need to be able to win this and listen to what they are saying. the secretary of state, what we hear on arab radio and television and newspapers, we go into our policy. we are dealing with other places in the world.
>> interesting to me, again, the times' reporting the interview, they said you have to accept our societal rules. i have no objection to upset -- accepting egyptian societal role so long as they apply to egyptians. when they impose them on other people, for example, blasphemy, we don't recognize blasphemy as a criminal offense. at all. the united states freedom of speech says there is no criminal charges of blasphemy. in arab coutnries, they - country- is, they kill people. -- in arab countries, they kill people. she found something that were
burned. they are responsible. in other countries, i think it was pakistan, a couple was charged with adultery. they have a rule that may not make characters o fmohamm -- of mohammed. the danish cartoonists are protected by danish police. enormously, in terms of trade, the new york times didn't even print those cartoons out of fear, undoubtedly. it is certainly worthy of public notice and would endanger their reporters.
in france, they said, we respect the muslim religion for them, but it is not for us. and they expect us to end our first amendment -- >> we, americans, can not accept that they have their culture and we have ours. we stand for freedom, rights, i don't think that you should back off of those for one moment. we support israel that has their values as well as ours. there is a very different set of
police. it is just imposed upon them by political and religious leadership. >> iran. before we get to that, i want to talk about the 1980 presidential election because you were involved with that one as well. and there might be a parallel here that we can discuss. historically, an american presidential elections, 50% of jews to vote for the democratic party. and president carter, the each got 40%. congressman anderson got 20%.
those numbers were just historic. it may or may not have influenced the race, but it had a post camp david ethos. yet another un resolution where they passed a resolution saying that jerusalem was occupied. and the occupation of jerusalem, that issue was not strongly preventing that. >> he directed the un delegates to vote for it. i was coming back from china and i was on the plane. the captain of the plan says
that the president would like you to call him before, when you land. when we land, i call this number and the president took the call. first, chit chat. then he says, have you heard about my problem? i say, yeah. he said, i need your help. he said to me, i did not know what was then that resolution. he lied. how do i know? because our delegate publicly said that he read the resolution to jimmy carter. jimmy carter instructed him to vote for it. >> there have been at least one abberant presidential a election in which jews voted in a divergent way. do either of you think that we might see that kind of dip for 2012, or does president obama
maintain the numbers on jewish voters? >> new york is a very important state. it is tough to say what will happen. i think that the president loses florida. >> is this a possible revisit and of 1980? -- revisiting of 1980? >> i think the president got the highest number of jews, the second-highest being 95% of all blacks. it's not hard to understand why. people, not only jews, we were
so excited that we would have an african american candidate president in the white house. i think that that pride or sense of feeling isn't something that you can say based on our history and how it wipes out. wipes out. in terms of what we did, we now have come to the point where a black man or a black woman or any other group could achieve that. i think he will not get 78%. i believe the president is going to win and be reelected and i hope the jewish community is part of that as opposed to being
decried as having tried to stop him. >> we will talk about iran and then we will take some questions and then we'll take another break. there is a holocaust subtext to today's discussion. it is dedicated to the holocaust memory and respect to the moral failure of nations that fail to act as well as moral righteousness, those that did. i thought one of the lessons of the holocaust, that is what they tell everyone in grade school, when a mad man says that he is about to kill everybody, or kill a group of people, you taken seriously. you're supposed to listen to people. and when you hear things broadcast in arabic stations, do we listen to them or do we treat it as this is the price you pay to live in a world of global diplomacy?
he has said his intention is to wipe israel off the map. i do not know whether hitler used words like that. he never actually said the final solution. >> he said if there is a war, he will hold the jews responsible. i remember that speech. there will be an elimination. >> ok. i think benjamin netanyahu equated hitler with ahmadinejad. some people were critical of that. nots not that's, but he is at the highest level of murderousness. >> i do not know how you distinguish between killing all jews and all jews within your authority, as hitler wanted to
do and almost did. >> if we have learned 65 years later, the lessons of the holocaust, why isn't the united states, the world, taking president ahmadinejad seriously? >> i was shocked when the new , billimes's former editor keller, had an article in which he said, why shouldn't iran have the nuclear bomb and then we will do what we did with russia, mutually assured destruction. president obama had said we do not accept contained in. we do not accept they should ever get the bomb and we will contain them. not at all. we will not let them get the
bomb. to have the former editor of the new york times propose that, i said mrs. chamberlain. -- this is chamberlain. give them the bomb. let them destroyed. we can contain them. what does that mean? they do not kill us. so, i -- to me, that was extraordinary. now, i do not happen to believe israel is going to do it on -- do it on its own. there is dissension as to whether or not it is possible. there was a tip of the hat as it related to that when benjamin netanyahu said it will take six months before they get their
bomb. six months is after the general election. i do not believe there will be an israeli intervention on their own. i do believe that the president should say an attack upon israel and upon saudi arabia by iran will be perceived as an attack upon the united states and we will respond militarily. why they have not said that, i thought i was the first to come up with that suggestion. not true. six months before in january, a senator made the statement that that is exactly what we should do. he is the chairman of the senate defense appropriations committee. he knows whereof he is speaking.
>> is what the mayor said going far enough? there are some people who think the united states should take a more aggressive approach, disable any possibility of a nuclear iran. >> last november, the zero intelligence briefings suggested that by september, october iran would have enough material to make two implosive devices. weapons-grade. they were working on that. the sanctions was going to try to slow this down. we know the number of
centrifuges they are creating and they have accelerated their program. they have not decreased it. the sanctions are working very well but then end goal is to see -- their end goal is to see we stop them from what they are doing. >> what about tweaking them out? that the sanctions eventually will work -- waiting them out? that the sanctions will eventually work? >> now the conversation has shifted to a more sophisticated weapon than an implosive device and maybe we are six months away from that. the device could be put in a container or something and sent to a harbor and to a great deal
of damage. we do not want them to get to the point where they can do that. prime minister netanyahu wanted to see the president. the president blew off that meeting because he did not want to hear what the prime minister was going to tell him. think about it. what does he want to tell him? here is the time line, mr. president. by this date, they are going to have it. we have to do something now. we have to get the inspectors in there to see that they don't. we have to force them to take that material out. the president did not want to have that meeting. he did not want to hear it. >> what is the mood -- you are both on the foreign relations committee. we do not have hearings on the subject. these are colleagues of yours.
what do the members of the committee think we should do? these are people for whom security is paramount. >> the topic is shifting more toward the tactical. there is a profound pessimism, even with our allies. ambassadors come in and chat with us. that this will be resolved in a diplomatic way. >> they are pessimistic about that. so everyone thinks we are sliding into -- >> some confrontation. and it is coming soon. there is talk on the consequences. we cannot simply attack and go about our business. this will set off a chain of unpleasant, long-term --
>> if a 15 minute amateur video that no one would have ever seen could set off ransacking embassies, one could imagine -- >> timeout. the people who organized this can stockpile insult to islam. there is enough that they can pull it out when they needed. this is our latest insult. let's get to the streets. i do not think this was some spontaneous demonstration. >> i hate to use the phrase -- >> let me say in support of his point, how come it happens on the anniversary of 9/11? >> that is fooling no one except our state department.
>> it is frightening that this is a sneak preview of far more radical -- >> they want to kill us. through history, there has been efforts by the islamists to resurrect the sulfonate that would run from spain to indonesia and include 1.4 billion muslims who would be under the rule of a religious leader and have a theocracy instead of the secular states that exist. >> this would be a massive iran. let's take some questions from the audience. i did not think anyone would have anything to say. [laughter] let's go right here. the microphone, two things.
extremely important. no speeches, only questions. and speaking to the microphone. c-span is here. you should have it recorded. oh, now she does not want to do it. all of a sudden she is shy. >> ok. basically it is a question. what i was going to say you have basically raised. the fundamental question is whether this administration has the -- has eight middle eastern policy. my feeling is, the administration ducks. you have mentioned extending the olive branch to egypt, starting out this way. voicing a few platitudes during
the iranian efforts against the administration. giving things to be israel's behind the back. >> and the question? >> i am going to get to the question. you have basically no policy, what it seems to me. it is endless reactive nest -- reactiveness. >> the question is this woman does not think the obama administration actually has a foreign policy, certainly consistent with the middle east. >> i think they are consistent in their inconsistency and lack of policy. we have been getting political slogans and not policies and
solutions. or leadership. >> if you need to leave, i can you go out the back? it is rude to our guest. >> our failings and foreign policy, what is the plan to address the budget where we are borrowing 42 cents on the dollar? what is the plan to salvage social security and medicare which is unsustainable? what is the plan? >> your sang -- >> we have had enough and now we are getting for word. we need something more. >> the answer is that the inconsistency. over here and a question. wait for the microphone. >> my question is, should the jewish population dissatisfied
with the fact that the christian a evangelicals are in our corner when it comes to israel? i heard a pastor on tv saying that jerusalem should be the capital of israel. i said this guy is really great. then he said, and with the resurrection of our lord and savior, he will be the ruler of jerusalem. >> you heard this. this woman said there is a mixed bag with the a evangelical support. >> jews are afraid of evangelicals, like you are. let me tell you how to handle it. i think the evangelicals are terrific and supportive of israel and should be encouraged. the fear that is often expressed
by jews is that they believe that before christ can come again that the jews have to accept him or they will die. that is the general exposition. my response is this -- if there is a report in the land that the messiah is here, seek him out. ask him if he is jewish. he must be jewish of the line of david. if he says that he is, and then say, is this your first visit or your second visit to? [laughter] if he says it is his first, then
the evangelicals will convert to judaism. if he says it is his second visit, then we should convert. >> you always summit up perfectly. -- sum it up perfectly. >> an evangelical support financially? quest as it turns out, we get no support financially, even from the republican party. sadly we have this -- and it is more pronounced in the islamic world, the eschatology, the end of days. a lot of people think this is coming soon and they can help it along.
this is some bad reasoning. what is coming out of iran is far more frightening than anything out of alabama. >> let's go back up there. one of those gentlemen up there. there you go. good choice. >> this question is for mayor koch -- i heard you when you supported bush that i do not agree with him on his foreign- policy -- >> i do not agree with him on a single domestic issue but that his position of opposing terrorism is far better than john kerry's who thinks that terrorism is a form of criminality. >> you also said he did not agree with him on most of the issues but as far as you're is -- israel is concerned, you supported israel.
>> you are not quoting me correctly. the quote is the one i gave you. >> when obama ran, you said you were supporting him because of the fact you heard he would be good for israel. >> that is not what i said at all. >> what is the question? >> said it now, that was one of the biggest mistake you ever made. >> please, what is your question. >> are you supporting obama and? >> yes. >> what is the reason why you are supporting him? >> i did already. i believe there is a whole aspect of issues to be considered and on domestic
issues, i will not go through it again, you cannot compare the democrats and republicans. the democrats are so far better on medicare and medicaid and social security and taxing the wealthy. and with respect to his position on israel, i hope to move him to mind. >> try this gentleman over here. we will come back. i feel like i was not clear the first time. questions, and not speeches. we do not need a resuscitation of what people have said. >> he mentioned the fact that he said the united states is insisting israel with all their military cooperation, is it a sign that president obama is good for the state of israel?
is it possible there has been some pressure that was applied to the israeli government and also is a possible that israel is being placed in a position where they have to say some positive statements for the obama administration because they have to hedge their possibility he may be reelected? >> the question is when it was said the united states under the obama administration, at least with respect to military expenditures and intelligence, right. intelligence information has been terrific. this gentleman speculates there has been pressure in israel for there to be a positive statement. >> i happen to believe he is an honorable man and he would not
say that if he did not believe it. i believe he believed it because it is true. >> congressman? >> i think the level of military support at about 3 billion is failing for quite a number of years now. the intelligence services have indeed worked very well together. when that statement was issued, that was probably before the joint israeli-american exercise was canceled in the gulf. it was a shocking surprise for the israelis. so i would take what was said there and factor that into it. >> how about this gentleman in the middle? the first two were late. [laughter] all right, you will be next. >> you can tell this is a jewish crowd.
>> what are my cautionary words again? >> my question is i would like to hear a response to the statement this morning by hank, what you think of that. given the location of the jewish vote and the numbers, he did not think it would be at all significant in this presidential election. because of the location. >> i never heard his name announced before. one of the leading pollsters recently indicated he did not see the jewish vote would make much of a difference in this election. >> it is a matter of opinion. >> the largest concentrations of the jewish vote in
california and new york, they may be decided. >> is there any question new york is going? >> i am not ready to write it off yet. >> that is the first time i heard you say something that -- [laughter] >> we will prove we are gender- neutral. you have to have a really good question. >> can i say something? she intimidated you. ofshe's scared the hell out me. >> one of our topics is the holocaust. before we get into too much about votes and policy in the u.s., can you on that when you mentioned munich? there was ample evidence in
europe and america of hitler's intentions before the first concentration camp was built. what is it that american jews do not understand about the rampant propaganda over the middle east? muslim schools, among the clerics, among their governments, that they want to get rid of the jews as they did before from their territories, from what they consider their [indiscernible]? their caliphate. if we have no answer, what can we do about it? >> you touched on this early on. you said younger jewish- americans, they do not get the concept. this woman is saying, what is it about what we are hearing, the noise and chatter in the arab-muslim world, specifically among younger jewish americans
or younger americans, period, that they have an unfamiliarity of the history? class i think that is true. young jews today do not know the history of the holocaust and it is really quite incredible. -- regrettable. you should understand. the goal of islam's has historically been the destruction of western civilization and the forced conversions of populations all over the world to islam. the sole exceptions would be christianity, christians and jews, if they accepted the supremacy of islam over their own religions.
this is a fight that has gone on for hundreds if not thousands of years and will not be over for many years to come. my fear is we lead the good life. they envy us, hit us, why? we have an extraordinary civilization. we want to live. we do not want to die. they believe if they die killing an infidel, they are lifted to heaven and have the services of 72 virgins. i did not make that up. when you look at some of the -- not the koran itself but other holy books in islam -- some and was upset because he was
criticized for using it. mohammed said look behind that tree. there is a jew behind that tree. kill the jew. i am paraphrasing. kill the jew is his language, not mine. nobody cared. you do not taken seriously. why not? they did not take adolf hitler seriously. they thought it was a moment in time past. it did not. >> i had a promise. [laughter] >> i just want to say this is 36 people who asked me this question. i asked you this question. my husband and i, we spend this summer in israel because we were lucky enough to have a 19- year-old grandchild.
the question they gave me, and they all give it to me, was, given obama's record, how could you put him into office a second year where he can then do anything? [applause] i have to say this. >> that was a good question. >> it is a factor as it relates to the vast majority of jews in making their decision. with jews, when the election is over, and president obama can no longer run again, and will his support of israel be kept as a commitment or will he burned the jews?
that is the heart of it. there is only one answer for people like me. i believe he is an honorable man. if i believe -- you may not. i believe he is an honorable man. if he makes the commitment, i believe he will keep it. it is as simple as that. >> let's take one more question. a much younger person. let's try your spirited will be the last question and then we will say goodbye. >> thank you. approximately an hour ago, the associated press release a story that a senior-ranking general in the iranian national guard stated that, in any situation, if israel would attack iran, they will see that as an attack coming from the united states report.
they will be open to retaliation by the iranian government. do you believe the obama administration and his policies are not taking an intimidating enough stance? they are not scared of us. >> this is a mirror image of your point. your point was president obama should say that the attack on israel is an attack against the united states. this young man says an hour ago, it was reported one of the generals, an iranian, just said an israeli attack on iran would be an attack on america. american military bases would be vulnerable to our retaliation. >> it does not shock me. the iranians, if they were able to kill and destroy every israeli, that would not stop them from trying to kill and destroy every american.
at this moment, they have the means to deliver a missile, to destroy israel. maybe two or three nuclear bombs would destroy the place. they did not have a capability to destroy the united states. once they do, i do not think they wouldn't use it. >> the iranians would attack us through the sarah gets. -- surrogets. 21 countries in a ride or revolt. we will see something like that. we will see course of action here. there is a network in south america, where there is a colony of over 30,000 people. we have offered as working, 450 in venezuela. in ecuador, etc.
if there is an attack, we better be prepared. it will be worldwide. >> let's try that gentleman over there. right there. >> when you said president obama should say, an attack on israel would result, an attack on america and america would respond, is that already not too late? said the attack the on iran before they develop the capability to attack? >> this is not a "gotcha" situation.
the president has already said we will not permit iran to get the nuclear bomb. he said that. hold it. what i am saying is that was clear -- that is what he has said. the united states will decide for itself when it is appropriate to stop them. israel has a different point of view. the united states has a different point of view. what i have said is totally different than that. and just as important. >> truly, the last question. this woman. i will have to get both of you. [laughter] two more. these two women. that one and that one.
>> one thing is true. the people who come to this conference are motivated. nobody is some of that was created by our esteemed guests. >> what is congress doing? i am petrified president obama will be reelected. what can congress do to rein in some of the things he has done? >> like what? >> groveling in cairo is number one. groveling. not in the way spain said he was apologetic. i am sorry, spain. he was groveling. the truth is the muslims understand, but they do not understand weakness. they take advantage of it. sending a birthday card is the most ridiculous thing in the
world. that is not it. i want to know what congress could possibly do to help. >> appropriations rise out of the house. we have to hold the house, which i will expect to happen. we have over 40 bills, many of them limiting aid to egypt, to other arab countries, until they do certain things or respond in a certain way. the senate is sitting on these right now. we can, even in next year, the next house can limit appropriations. but that is limited. the senate still has approval on treaties and the president has executive power. but, if you look at past
history, the polls, the demographics, the president should lose 54 to 46, and the republic will be saved. thank you very much. >> last question. and we will say goodbye to our guests. the question? >> yes, just a question. in a couple of days, wednesday. the platform will be taken at the united nations general assembly. my question escapes what actions can we be taking similar to canada shedding their embassy, what can the united states do with regard to the international court of justice? there is talk right now about recognizing the fact that he is on a genocidal task.
his calls are genocidal. that is against a member nation of the united nations. how can we as america do something to ensure iran is thrown out of the united nations? he cannot be given platforms like this. he is now the secretary for the mam for the next three years. >> how can the united states get iran thrown out? do you realize iran just held a meeting with 40 countries? i thought it was 40. even more important, 120. you are suggesting the president should organize an assembly to throw iran out? listen, you'll forgive me, but it is ridiculous. we pay dues but we do not
decide how countries will vote. thank god none of the votes in the assembly are mandatory in terms of being carried out. that has to be done through the security council, where we have a veto. to suggest that we go down the path of trying to throw iran out of the assembly, you are spinning your wheels. thank you. >> congressman? >> to even debate the efficacy of the u.n. is a waste of time. they are a colossal failure. [applause] the league of nations, we have had some successes in humanitarian aid and some peacekeeping. beyond that, this is an enormous
propaganda machine against us and against western civilization. we ought to recognize it as such. >> with that final word, we want to thank the former mayor ed koch. and bob turner. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> i watched c-span when there are even going on. that is when i tune in the most. i want to watch c-span because of they have that basse, unbiased view of whatever is happening if i want to get spun in a circle i will watch something else. i watched them on tv or on line. if something is going on, i always turn to c-span. i do not know that i have a favorite show. anytime i need to know what is
going on, i know c-span will have the real story. >> josh truitt watches c-span on direct tv, brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> the attacks on these civilians were attacks on america. we are grateful for the assistance we have received from the libyan government and the libyan people. there should be no doubt we will be relentless in tracking down the killers and bringing them to justice. i also appreciate that the leaders of other countries, including egypt, and yemen, have taken steps to secure our diplomatic facilities and so have religious authorities
around the globe. i understand the attacks of the last two weeks are not simply an assault on america. they are also an assault on the very ideals upon which the united nations was founded. the notion people can resolve their differences peacefully, the policy can take the place of war, that in an interdependent world, all of us have a stake in working toward greater opportunity and security for our citizens. if we are serious about upholding these ideals, it will be not be enough to put more guards in front of an embassy or statements of regret, if we are serious about these ideals, we must speak about the deeper causes of the crisis because we face a choice between the forces
that would drive us apart, and the hopes we have in common. >> a reminder you can see all of president obama's speech tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. after that, mitt romney spoke to the clinton global initiative today about foreign aid and the recent attack on the u.s. consulate in libya and also coming up, mitt romney will be speaking in ohio at about 3:00 p.m. eastern, 15 minutes from now. we will have that live for you.
in fact, we will take you to ohio now. the airport just outside of dayton. mitt romney and paul ryan this afternoon here on c-span 3. >> i am proud of my high school and a half to give a shout out to the people back here. -- i have to give a shout out to the people back here. president mitt romney will turn the economy around so people will be able to join our economy and they will make a difference. i have a question for you, who is going to turn the economy around and create jobs? >> mitt romney! >> who was going to build up our national security? who is going to make us proud? and who are we going to greet with a warm welcome? >> romney!
>> glad you are here today. >> thank you. in just a moment, we are going to walk on the next president of the united states, governor romney. i am so proud of this ticket. that me tell you i am also proud of paul ryan. i wore my miami university tie. here is what we have to do. we know the race is going to come down to the wire. we have always known it is going to be close. it is going to come down to last. it is going to come down to one states, oh -- >> io. >> we have to do our job. absentee ballots. if you'd have a friend who does not have an absentee ballot,
tell them how to apply and get it. it is easy. make sure your parents have their ballots. if you have a daughter or a son in college, e-mail them, i did that to my daughter last night. she came back to me within about five minutes. dad, i have already done it and applied. that is what we need to do. when we think about this election, it really is about our kids and grandkids, where do we want to be in the year 2016? imagine the difference. one person has one division and what made this country and the other has another vision, it comes down to the simple question, who do you think bill to this country? who built it? was that the government? was that the people, was it you,
our fathers and mothers? we built this country. that is the difference. obamacare, we fought this in court. the battle comes back to you. the people of the state of ohio, last year said no to obamacare. we have to do the same thing. we are not going to repeal obamacare unless we change the president of the united states. governor romney has pledged to do that. barack obama will not do that. if we want to look at the deficit, everybody knows the problem with the deficit. who do we think is more likely to deal with the deficit? someone who has run it up over a trillion dollars every year he has been in office? is that too is going to do it to? or do we think governor romney,
a businessman who is committed to fiscal responsibility is going to do it? who is going to do it to? if the barack obama is in the white house four years from now, he will have appointed one half of all federal judges and he will have changed the complexion of the added states supreme court for decades. can we stand that in this country? is that what we want to? no. foreign affairs. the president of the united states went to new york today, yesterday. other presidents have gone to meet with world leaders to sit down with the israelis and other allies, people who he needs to understand. and interesting article this morning about his failure to do that.
he went to new york not to meet with world leaders, he is on "the view." [booing] what a sense of priorities. he said after our ambassador was killed, after we look at the situation in iran, rioting against the united states, that is just a bump in the road. ladies and gentlemen, we need someone who is going to have a firm hand in regard to foreign affairs, a man who exercises the right judgment, a man who will be a leader for the united states, who is that man? governor romney. there is a lot at stake. we come down to the final push in this campaign and it will come down to ohio. it will come down to what you and i do in the next 40 days.
as absentee ballots go out, talk to your neighbors, make the phone calls, come to the victory centers, and if we do everything we need to do, then ohio will be on the right side. we will be on the right side. we will set the stage for a great future for the people of ohio and our nation, for our children and grandchildren. let's give a warm welcome to the next president of united states, governor romney. his plane will be here in a moment. ♪ ♪
i am on the gravel road, look at me on my way to picky what -- pick you up >> just outside dayton, ohio, you heard the senator introducing mitt romney. he should be there in a couple of minutes as part of a bust for -- bus tour with paul ryan. mitt romney was in new york city earlier today part of the clinton global initiative speaking there this morning and talking about u.s. foreign aid. while we wait for him to speak, here is some of what he had to say. >> for it to become more effective, it has to embrace the principles you see in these
global initiatives, the power of partnerships, access to the transformative nature of free enterprise, and the leverage of the abundant resources that can come from the private sector. i believe there are three objects of our foreign aid in the country. the first is to address humanitarian needs. it has given medical treatment 2 million suffering from hiv and aids. second is to foster a strategic interest, military or diplomatic or economic. third, another purpose, one that has to receive much more attention in the ron the administration. that is something that elevates people and brings about lasting change in communities and nations. for example, a lot of americans, including myself, are troubled by developments in the middle east.
syria has witnessed the killing of tens of thousands of people. the president of egypt is a member of the muslim brotherhood. our ambassador to libya was assassinated in a terrorist attack. iran is moving toward nuclear weapons capability. we somehow feel we are at the mercy of events rather than shaping events. i am asked why. what can we do about it, to lead in the middle east to stability and ease the suffering, anger, and hate, and the violence? religious extremism is part of the problem. that is not the whole story. the population of the middle east is very young, particularly in comparison to the population of the developed nations. typically these young people do not have a lot of job prospects, for the levels of youth unemployment across the
region are excessive and chronic. the nations that have undergone a change in leadership recently, young people have greater access to information, and in the past that was being carefully guarded by tyrants and dictators. now it is available. they see that good as well as the bad in surrounding societies. they can now organized across mobilizing populations. accumulated by poverty and -- humiliated by poverty and crushed by government frustration, their frustration and anger in such a setting, for americans to change lives, change communities and nations in the middle east, foreign aid must play a role, and the shape that role should play was >> that is mitt romney speaking at the clinton global initiative about foreign aid and the recent attack on the u.s. consulate in libya.
we will have all of that speech tonight on the c-span. he will be following the president's address to the united nations at 8:00. this is the dayton airport and the crowd is waiting for her candid it mitt romney and his vice-presidential running mate candidate mitt romney and his vice-presidential running mate paul ryan. a legal challenge to the president's health-care law. >> thank you for being with us. >> good morning. >> let me show our viewers the headline. oklahoma challenges the health law in a new suit, the supreme
court had ruled on president obama's health-care law. you have filed a new suit, what is it? >> we filed in january of 20 11 and within two weeks, we filed a separate action from the proceedings and florida. there was a total of 28 states. the focus of our original lawsuit was about the constitutionality of the law in its totality as a related to the commerce clause and the individual mandate. we began that litigation and motions were filed by the government and then the case was taken to the supreme court. after the decision, i filed a motion to lift the stay in oklahoma asking the judge to consider an amendment to our
complaint. as you know, the original challenge about the constitutionality of the law, this is about implementation. this addresses the concerns about the irs ruled that was adopted on may 18 and the affordable care act's implementation of the employer mandate, the penalty that is known under the law dealing with large employers. our lawsuit is about that r ule and is seeking to hold government accountable as it relates to implementing that portion of the a lot. host: what about that part of the law is unconstitutional? what are you arguing? guest: the specifics include that under the aca, if a state is not the bar -- adopt an exchange, the tax credits do not issue to that state and the
employer mandate penalty does not accrue, either. the irs disregarded that under the statute and said what their estate as an exchange or a federal exchange, it will provide the tax credits and subsidies under the aca and subject to businesses and the states to an employer mandate penalty. we are challenging that. we believe it is inconsistent with the reading of the statue. we believe the state of oklahoma has been harmed. states have two decisions to make. one is to expand medicaid, whether we should do that or not, and to adopt a health-care exchange. both have consequences and benefits policy makers are deciding. as you know, there are 20 states that have chosen not to adopt a
state health-care exchange. the consequences the tax subsidies and credits do not go to the citizens of the state and the employer mandate assessment does not flow to the states, either. the irs has disregarded that. they have proceeded and adopted a rule that is inconsistent with a lot. we are host: if you win this, how would small businesses or large businesses in this case benefit from your proceedings? guest: well, the benefit is that in the state of oklahoma employers would not be subject to the employer mandate penalty because there is no state health care exchange. effectively the state of oklahoma is making a policy decision. we have a decision we must make and by i.r.s. action they have taken that decision away. they have said the benefits that would accrue to oklahoma or any
state, the benefit of not -- your employers not being subject to the employer machine -- mandate tax, they would ignore that and implement the rule so it would be a competitive advantage offense other states that adopt an exchange. that is a policy decision they have decided to make. host: the exchange itself, are you arguing with that, the set-up of the insurance exchanges in a state? guest: in the manner that the state has a choice to make about adopt the state exchange or not. if it chooses not to adopt an exchange -- host: the oklahoma governor said i'm going to wait until of the election, correct? guest: that's correct. all intentions presently equal that the state of oklahoma is not going to adopt the state
healthcare exchange. 20 other states have done the same. and the current provisions of the law say that the employers in our state therefore are not subject to the employer man indict penalty. the i.r.s. has disregarded that. this is not a new phenomenon in the sense that in november of 2011 there were congressional inquiries about the i.r.s. they said they were going to disregard the distinction and apply subsidies in both of those federal and state exchanges. many in congress questioned that and said that was inconsistent with the clear reading of the law. they made inquiry of the i.r.s. the i.r.s. said they were going to disregard the distinction but didn't cite a statutory authority and finalized the rule ay 18 and it is fundamental ly inconsistent with the power of
an agency. the agency only has the power congress granted and if they exceed that by adopting a rule it should be challenged. and states are making decisions based upon rule of law and reading of the a.c.a. and benefits and consequences of adopting an exchange, spending medicaid, et cetera. the i.r.s. is changing the rules midstream through regulatory action that is inconsistent under the law and we are seeking to enforce that by arguing they violated the stpraeuf procedures act -- administrative procedures act. host: many states are preparing for healthcare law by setting up these healthcare skhaeupexchang. some states like arizona who do not lake the idea of exchanges. they are setting one up their
argument being it is better that if we have to do this that we control our exchange system rather than the federal government because under the affordable care act if a state doesn't set one up the federal government steps in and sets one for you. guest: what i would say to that is in some respects i'm agnostic whether any state should adopt an exchange. that is specifically a policy decision. whatever policy decision is made by oklahoma, in this case not to implement an exchange, there should be protections based on what the law says on what occurs if you choose not to implement an exchange. what is not talked about much is it is -- if one person qualifies for a tax credit at a business that doesn't provide qualifying health insurance so they have 600 employees and one qualifies for a credit, the employer is
responsible for the employer mandate assessment for all 600 employees. that is about $1.1 million penalties for the sake of one person. the proceportionality is a problem. the congress set up an incentive to say we want states to set up exchanges. we will incentivize that by providing subsidies and tax credits to employees that and it is beneficial for state because they take ownership of the exchange. thank is a little contrived because as you know h.h.s. and other agencies at the federal level perhaps will adopt rules that will shape and form the exchanges. it is naive to think the state will have slut authority over the establishment and maintenance of the state exchange far in the future. i think that is something that what occur. but if a state close to do that they made a policy decision.
in this instance, oklahoma as other states have said we won't adopt the exchange and the law confines agencies at the federal level to say this is what happens when that occurs. tax subsidies and credits don't flow but at the same time the credit -- excuse me -- the assessment that -- for the player for failing to provide the insurance doesn't flow to that state. that is a policy decision that must be preserved. above that, this is about enforcing the clear language of the law. you have an agency that is taking action in contravention of that clear reading and adopted a rule that they don't have authority to do. that is what we are challenging. host: what do you say to those who say exchanges are set up to help drive down the cost of healthca healthcare? there is this story in the "washington post" this morning health insurance costs
accelerate and they are saying that hospitals are charging more rather than more people seeking healthcare that is not the case but hospitals are charging more and the insurance companies are going long with it. these state exchanges are supposed to give people more options and therefore drive down the cost of insurance for those people. for the oklahoma citizens 18% of which do not have insurance, isn't this a good thing? i would say the same thing we said in march of 2010. when attorneys general across the country initiated the original challenge to the affordable care act, it was brought not because we had an to healthcare policy or reform. it was brought because we believed it was inconsistent with the constitution. that the individual mandate that was at that time adopted under
the power of the commerce clause, we believe, competed that authority under the constitution. we believe that the medicaid expansion in the act exceeded the spending purr of the u.s. government -- power of the u.s. government and on both of those points we won. it was not about politics or whether we should have healthcare reform or healthcare changes. it was always about the and whether the federal government had the authority to do what they did. i would say the same thing here. whether market based exchanges, federal or state, is good for oklahoma citizens or virginians is a policy decision. but the congress has spoken clearly here. congress has said to the states you have a decision to make. here is your decision. expand medicaid or adopt an exchanges. here are the benefits that you receive on behalf of your
citizens on both counts. states are making the decisions as we speak. oklahoma has chosen not to adopt an exchange. the benefit of that is that our employers are not subject to the employer mandate penalty. and, as you indicated, perhaps other states will make a different decision. but we must enforce what the law says. it is about making sure an agency, in this case the i.r.s., does what the law says. we believe they have exceeded in by approving that statute that is not unique to oklahoma because there were others in washington questioned in never of last year. so this must be addressed by the courts to ensure states have the ability it make an informed decision about the policy consequences -- >> "washington journal" is available any time on c-span.org. we go back to dayton
♪ >> montgomery county! are you ready to win? >> yes. >> are you ready for a brighter future for your family, for our state, for our country? >> you are in the right place. we are going to win this race because everybody is working their hearts out, aren't you? and we have a terrific organization in montgomery county and miami valley but we need your help. how many have made a phone call, put up a sign or gone door to door? god bless you. we need you to do more. there goes a sign right there.
we need you to do more. i'm told there are absentee ballot applications here. how many have already gotten your absentee ballot applicatio applications? in hairman of the campaign their the best thing we can do is bank votes. so vote absentee and be sure to get the word out and folks you go to church with, people you see in your neighborhood who may or may not want to vote. tell them we need their vote. ready to do that? >> yeah. >> thank you. look, here in the miami valley and dayton we have had some tough times. i went through a closed plant on the way in. i think of the delphi workers. there are 1,000 dell if i workers left behind by the obama administrati administration. it was unfair, wasn't it? it was part of the way they did the auto bailout. not fair to the workers here in the miami valley and was not fair to workers all around our
country. those delphi workers deserve our support, don't they? >> yeah. >> i look at the fact they were working through the weakest economic recovery since the great depression. it was not just delphi workers left behind. yet the president of the united states says i deserve re-election because my economic policies are working. >> boo! >> he says pass this stimulus package and unemployment will be 50% lower than it is today. does it sound like it is working to you? it doesn't sound like it to the four million workers that don't have a job. talk about the health care bill. he said let me jam this obama care through the united states congress and healthcare costs will go down $2,500 per family. instead they have gone up $2,500 per family. is it working? >> no.
>> he said if he was elected he would cut the deficit in half. remember that one? it has been another trillion dollar deficit four in a row. that is 50% higher. is it working? >> no. >> it's not working and it is worse than that. the poverty rate is high. food stamps have gone up 50%. is it working? 4,300 dollars cut in take-home pay. is it working? >> no. >> here is the good news. help is on the way. >> yeah! >> mitt romney and paul ryan have the experience and record and they have the public policy plans to put america back to work. before we give a warm miami valley welcome to the next president and vice president of the united states i want you to give a warm welcome to a
colleague of mine and friend who snuck across the border from kentucky today. he is a doctor who understands the dangers of obama care. he is a fiscal conservative who understands the nature of the record debts and deficits and understands they are a danger to our country and kids. finally, folks, he is someone who believes that we can not afford another four years of this. gentlemen, i give you mr. paul. >> anybody think it is time for a new president? >> anybody here think like i do that obama care is still unconstitutional? >> yeah.
>> anybody here offended and mortified to see people around the world burning the american flag? >> yeah! >> president obama's response? send them more money. >> boo! >> they are attacking our embassies, burning our flag, torturing and imprisoning the man who helped us get bin laden. what is president obama's answer? send more of your money. >> boo! >> do you remember when the president kind of sidled up to the russians and winked and said talk to me after the election? anybody here worried about that? >> yeah! >> here we have the president, you have to imagine you have seen the restrained barack obama so far. obama care is the restrained version.
anybody worried about the unrestrained version? >> yeah! >> the restrained barack obama has given you $6 trillion in new debt. can you imagine what the unrestrain unrestrained obama might do? he has given you tens of thousands of pages of new regulations. can you imagine what the obama will do? there is a real and significant difference in visions between president obama and governor romney and congressman ryan. this is really what this election is about. it's not about specific tax rates or a specific law. it is about the vision for our country. it is about whether or not you still believe, do we believe that any of us or any of our children, regardless of where you came from, who you are, what color your skin is or what your race or religion is, that anyone
can climb that ladder to success in america. >> yeah. >> if we still believe in that, that is what this is about. everywhere you go you hear the president say he is going to get those people. he blames somebody for unemployment but it is not his fault. it is never his doing. it is still george bush's fault four years later. when i think about give romney i think about someone who has held office but i think about his success in other areas. i want somebody had has been a successful businessman, or woman. i want somebody who has been successful turning around the olympics, someone who is not the politician. poll testiitici we need new ideas and i'm proud to be here to introduce the team of governor romney and congressman paul ryan. >> i appreciate it. thanks, buddy.
>> o.h. >> ohio. >> works every time. i got my lucky buckeye. rob portman gave me this lucky buckeye. it means we are going to win ohio. the other reason we are going to win ohio, we are going to give you our fellow citizens a clear choi choice. we owe you that. you see, our choice is do we stay on the same path we are on, the one that obama put us on, a nation in debt, in doubt and decline, or do we reclaim the founding principles and get the country back on the right track? >> yeah!
>> after four years the recovery that president obama promised is nowhere in sight. he said if he just could borrow a bunch of money and spend it on his friends unemployment would never get above 8%. it has been above 8% for 43 months. we had 23 million americans struggling to find work, 15% of our fellow countrymen and women are in poverty today. president obama, the economy is barely growing, he's run out of ideas and just the other day on tv he said that he can't change washington from the inside. why do we send presidents to washington in the first place? isn't that what we are supposed to do? don't we send them with a message to washington? if he can't change washington we need to change presidents and we need to elect this man the next
president of the united states. the choice before us is very clear. we are offering real reforms for a real recovery. we cannot afford four more years of president obama's failed policies. what mitt romney is offering, what we are saying is, here are big ideas, big solutions, that are designed to get people back to work. proven policies to get our country back on track. mber one, all across america, we have our energy. let's use that energy and put people back to work. gas, oil, coal, minerals, it is here, it is ours, and on day one
he will say yes to the keystone pipeline so we can get that will coming to our country. in our state, midwestern manufacturing states, we have lost a lot of work. a lot of people in the prime of their lives, they are in between. we have to have a system where people can get skills they need to get back on track, to get in a career said that the american dream can be placed within their reach. we need to fix our schools. we need to honor to parents and as children and not the special interests that are standing in the way of these educational reforms. we need trade that works for america so we can make more things in america and sell them overseas.
it is a simple idea. we cannot keep spending money we just do not have. we have got to balance this budget. we have got to get this debt under control. it is our duty to save the american dream for the american children and grandchildren. we have to remember that most of our jobs in this country come from those small businesses, from those successful small businesses in this country. we need to reform hours tax system. we need to acknowledge the idea that if you have a small business, you built that small business. you get the credit for that. the obama economic agenda failed not because it was stopped, but
because it past. let's not forget that in his first two years he had full control of government. he got almost everything he wanted. the next two years he spent regulating. this is killing jobs, plaguing our businesses with uncertainty. we had specific ideas to get people back to work, to get the economy growing again, to create jobs, to get job security, to get people back on the path of opportunity. we know that the genius of this country is the worker. it is the small business person, it is not our government.
after four years of getting the runaround, we need to get a turnaround. this is the man who can do a turnaround. what we also believe -- especially here in dayton -- we believe in peace through strength, and that means not getting -- cutting the military, not shutting down that plant in lima. i see a marine right there, army right there, i saw a navy guy right there. i know there is somebody from the air force here. take you for your service, we will honor you, and that means job security in ohio as well. this is the moment where the of men are meeting.
we need somebody who will not blame others, who will take responsibility, who will fix things. that is this man right here. when his country called and when they asked him to save the olympics, he served and he saved it. this is a man who knows how the economy works because he has created over 10,000 jobs. i think it is a good thing he is a successful businessman because being successful in business is something that we want. we are proud of people's success. we want war of success in this country. -- we want more of success in this country. when this man was governor -- >> romney, romney.
>> and as governor, when this man was governor, he did not blame, he did not doubt, he did not demagogue, he got things done. unemployment went down, the credit rating was approved, income went up, he reached across the aisle and balance the budget without raising taxes. that is the kind of leadership we finally meet in washington. that is not what we have. ladies and gentlemen, he has not only succeeded, but he has done so where others could not. this president is not succeeding. this president cannot run on his record. this president will say anything and everything to try and blame, to try and talk, to try and restore, to try to divide, to try to distract, to try to win
by default. you know what? we will not let him because we romney be the next president of the united states. mitt romney. >> wow, that is quite a guy. isn't that something? romney, ryan, romney, ryan, there we go. senator or rand paul, thank you for being here. and you are a great senator. robert portman, he has campaigned for me all over the country. do you know what he does put he plays barack obama. he placed them well. i want to kick him out of the room or something.
he is so good. he does not convince me. he said, "you beat me again." he likes my arguments better. he knows they are right. lee greenwood, where is he? there he is, right there, brought to be an american. thank you. thank you one more time. he said it right. i am proud to be here with so many who served our country. what a contribution that makes to our country. i have been with the base, met with leaders there. how many veterans are here? will you raise your hands? look at that. i love one of our national mns.
thank you to our veterans. if i am president, -- when i am president of the united states, i will not cut our military budget or our commitment to keep america's military second to none in the world. this is an election which is a dramatic choice for the american people. it is a question about the soul of america. we know the course the president has laid out. his plan for the next four years if you have read about his speech, you know what he said. he said we are going to go forward, or of the same. i think for ward is a better term. no new ideas, no i diaz about how he will create jobs. it was a repeat of what he said for years ago.
he will bring the deficit down. he doubled it. we still have over 8% unemployment. his plan is another stimulus. how did the first one go? how about $800 billion? how much did you get? cash for clunkers, did you get that? he has one new idea, one thing he did not do in his first four years, which is to raise taxes. is there anybody who thinks raising taxes will help grow the economy? his plan is to continue what he has done before, and the status quo has not worked. we cannot afford four more years of barack obama. we will not have four more years of barack obama. his plan and approach says fundamentally that government knows better than you how to
live your life, how to pick winners and losers, how to choose companies to be successful, that a group of bureaucrats, real smart people, working hard -- they know better than free people. he will put them in the most important relationship that you have, and that is the relationship between you and your doctor. he is gone to put government there. he wants government more and more expensive and interested. do you know how much money he has been in one year that he put in companies? he spent $90 billion. he set it to companies that in many cases were owned by campaign contributors of his. this is a vision of government that is entirely for an.
the idea of a larger government, taking more from the people, and treating yourself with your relationship with your doctor, picking winners or losers, or in his case, losers. that is not the america i know, the america that bill ohio -- ohio.ill uilt i have an entirely different course. i will restore the principles the founders described when they were to declaration of independence. our rights came from god himself. among those rights were life and liberty and pursuit of happiness. we are free in this nation to pursue happiness as we choose. now and then there is a person who has some idea and pursues it, not because the government told them to do it, because it
came into their minds and they said they are going to tried out their ideas. most ideas do not work, but when they do, they left other people to get to work there. if they get successful, many people get great jobs and a bright future. that is how our economy works. it is driven by free people, and if this president persists on the road and making it harder for small businesses to grow and thrive, he will slowly weakened our economy and turn us into greece, and we must not let it happen. i know what i am gone to do. i will restore the principle of free enterprise, people pursuing their dreams as they wish. we want our kids to get an education that will give them the skills so they can build their own futures. that is the nature how america
works. he gets his largest single funding from the teachers' union. nothing wrong with them, but the president should be focused on that needs of the kids come out not focused on the needs of the teachers union. i want to put our kids and teachers themselves and the parents first and the union behind. small business. paul ryan said we need to help small business. it is tough getting a business going. , i want people to start opening doors at hiring people. i have seen the entrepreneurs across america. i met a woman who has her own business. she saidm "my husband lost his job and took a job in upholstering." she started her own company and
hired him as her first employee. she hired 39 new people, and that put people to work. that is how america works. i met a guy in central illinois. jim graduated second in his high-school class, second from the bottom, and he concluded college was not part of his future. he went to his dad and said, will you flow to be a loner? he was going to do the work, and his dad would put up the money, and they decided to do it 50%- 50%. by the time he costed it all o ut, it was a lot more money. he concluded that he could make sandwiches because sandwiches did not take equipment. he got tables and set them up and started making sandwiches,
and then he would deliver them. now he has 1500 restaurants and employs 60,000 americans. this is the fundamental question of americans have to ask. do we believe bureaucrats are better at telling us what kind of health care we should have an insurance? do we believe they are better at what businesses to invest in, do we believe that free people pursuing their dreams will build a stronger economy? that is what i believe. this president has a plan for small business. he will raise their taxes. i was with and entrepreneurs in st. louis who is in the electronics industry. he has four employees. he said he and his son calculated how much money they
owe the government. he went and said i calculated my federal income tax, federal payroll tax, why state income tax, state sales tax, gasoline tax, and real estate tax, and by the time i ended up, more than half of what we make we give to government. i thought -- you think about this -- take the risk of starting an enterprise that will hire other people, when you did not even have a 50%-50% chance to succeed. if you are successful, the government wants half of what you make. what is the president's plan? raise taxes further. he wants to take the federal income tax rate from 35% to 44 cents i, and that will kill jobs. this is a president who is bent on growing government.
i am bent on growing jobs and raising take-home pay and we will do it. paul ryan described the five things we will do. take advantage of energy. dick's our schools. -- fix our schools. number four, balance our budget. number 5 we will champion small businesses. coming back to number 3, trade. trade is good for us. people in ohio and sell products any where, and can compete with anyone in the world. i understand when we trade and when other nations trade on a fair basis, we will create jobs. i understand when people cheat that kills jobs. china has cheated. i will not allow that to continue.
it is not over. how does a nation cheat? let me tell you. one way is to artificially hold down the value of your currency. that do? it makes your products artificially less-expensive. estimates are china has held on to up to 30%, and so their products will be back cheaper. what does that do to american companies competing in those industries? they lose sales, so they have to lay off people, and go out of business. they have been holding down their currency. they steal intellectual property. patents, designs, know-how. even counterfeit our goods. i was with a company in the midwest that said they have products coming back, valves. they said they were getting
warranty claims on these valves that were breaking. they had their packaging on it. they realized they are counterfeit. these are not our product. they have been sold as our product with our brand name, marco adds. these products are coming into this country, being counterfeited overseas. there is an apple store in china. selling apple ipad and iphones come to accept it is not an apple store. it is counterfeit. this kind of practice has to stop. they have even hacked into our computers. they have looked at computers of our corporations. this cannot be allowed. we cannot compete with people who do not play fair, and i will stop it in its tracks. i love this country.
i know it is based upon, this nation is a nation that makes me proud. i have had the chance to see folks from all over this great state and country. i know it will take something to bring us back. we will create 12 million new jobs and we will cost take-home pay to go up. it has gone down every year for four straight years. how can people say they want four more years of president obama? we cannot afford four more years president obama. we will turn this country around and create good jobs again. it matters a bit it matters -- if it matters. it matters for the 50% of college graduates that cannot find work tick. how can these people think that they will vote for president
obama? where we pass along trillion- that's -- it is immoral to pass on that kind of debt to our kids. matters for the world. i was lucky enough to be in poland, got to meet with a hero, walesa. what a guy. shipyard worker. in that country the soviet union executed some 20,000 polish leaders. this is not conjecture. yet despite that history, that man said no to the soviet union, and by virtue of what he did, he helped change the world. i talked to him and i came in to meet with him out and he looked at me, and he said, you must be tired, you sit, i will talk. you will listen. i did.
then he said this. he said america is the only superpower on the planet. we need american leadership. then he described a place in the world, the middle east, and he would say, where is american bishop? we need american leadership. then he would talk about a problem and say, where is american leadership of this does not mean we send our guns there. this means we stand up with economic power, diplomatic power, principles. we fight with people we believe in. when people in toronto to the streets, which have a president that says something that does not stay silent. it means with the developments in the middle east the days, when we have an ambassador assassinated, 20,000 people killed in syria, when we have a muslim brotherhood leader heabee the leader of the jet, when we
have iran coming closer to a nuclear weapon, we need a president he takes this seriously and gets the country on track. it matters. american leadership matters. for us to have leadership, we have to have strong homes and values and a commitment to our principles. we have to have a comment second it to none. we have to have a military no one will ever think of testing. i will bring these things back to america and keep america strong. if you agree with paul and me, that we cannot afford four more years, that we cannot afford four more years of wondering whether kids will be looking for a job when they get out of school, if you agree with me, i need you to find people who voted for barack obama and convince them to join acting,
because together we will strike this -- strengthen this country. the world needs american leadership. we do, and we will bring it. thank you so barron much. thank you. -- thank you so very much. thank you. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]
>> mitt romney getting back on board the bus. the bus tour here. it winding its way through ohio. few have been watching live coverage here on c-span. it just want to let you know about the debate coverage plan. off the debate still underway beginning next week. three presidential debates beginning next wednesday, 7:00 with our debate preview and three days following. if the first on october 3, the 16th, and the 22nd. 7:00 p.m. eastern. the debate itself, 9:00. all of that here on c-span, c- span radio, and on c-span.org. president obama earlier today was the united nations. part of the general assembly. if he talked about foreign aid and if iran pose a nuclear program and the assassination of
chris stevens. chris was born in a town in california. the son of a lawyer and a musician. as a young man, chris and joined the peace corps and taught english in morocco he came to love and respect the people of north africa and the middle east. he would carry that commitment throughout his life. as a diplomat, he worked from egypt to syria. from saudi arabia to libya. he was known for walking the streets of the city where he " -- where he worked, tasting the local food, meeting as many people as he could, speaking arabic, listening with a broad smile crest went to bed gauzy in the early days of the libyan revolution. -- with a broad smile.
he went there during the early days of the libyan revolution and helped the people cope with a violent conflicts, cared for the union, and crafted -- cared for the wounded, and crafted a vision where all would be supported. he supported the birth of a new democracy as libyans held elections and built new institutions. he began to move a forward after decades of dictatorship. chris stevens love his work. he took pride in the country he served anti sought dignity in the people that he met. two weeks ago, he traveled to establish a new cultural center and build a hospital. that is when the compound came under attack, along with three of his colleagues, chris was killed in the city that he
helped to save. he was 52 years old. a study this story because chris stevens embody the best of america. like his fellow foreign service officers, he built divisions -- he built bridges across oceans. he is deeply invested in the vision that the united nations represents. he acted with humility, but he also stood up for a set of principles. a belief that individuals should be free to determine their own destiny and live with liberty, and dignity, justice, and opportunities. the attacks on the civilians in benghazi were attacks on america. we are grateful for the assistance we receive from the libyan government and from the libyan people. there should be no doubt that we will be relentless in tracking
down the killers and bringing them to justice. i also appreciate that in recent days, the leaders of other countries in the region, including egypt, tunisia, and yemen, have taken steps to secure our diplomatic facilities. and so have religious authorities around the world. but, understand that the attacks of the last two weeks are not simply an assault on america. there are also an assault on the very ideals upon which the united nations was founded. the notion that people can resolve their differences peacefully. diplomacy can take the place of work. -- diplomacy can take the place of war. all of us have a stake in working for a greater opportunity for our citizens. if we are serious about
upholding these ideals, it will not be enough to put more guards in front of an embassy or to put out statements of regret and wait for the outrage to pass. we are serious about these ideals. we must speak honestly about the deeper causes of the crisis because we face a choice between the forces that would drive us apart and the hopes that we hold. today, we must reaffirm that our future will be determined by people like chris stevens and not by his killers. today, we must declare that this of violence has no place among our united nations. -- this kind of a violence has no place among our united nations. it has been years since a man set himself on fire to protest and became known as the arab
spring. the country has been captivated by what has taken place. the united states has supported the forces of change. we were inspired by the tunisian protests that toppled dictator because we recognize our own police in the aspirations of men and women who took to the streets. we insisted on change in egypt because our support for democracy ultimately put us on the side of the people. we supported a transition of leadership in a yemen because the interests of the people were no longer being served by a corrupt status quo. we intervened in libya alongside a broad coalition and with a mandate of united nations security council because we had the ability to start project to stop the slaughter of innocents -- we had the ability to stop
the slaughter of innocents. as we meet here, we declared the regime must come to an end so the suffering of the syrian people can stop and a new dawn can begin. we have taken these positions because we believe that freedom and self-determination are not unique to one culture. these are not simply american values or western values. they are universal values. even as there will be huge challenges to come with a transition to democracy, i am convinced that ultimately government of the people, by the people, and for the people is more likely to bring about the stability, prosperity, and individual opportunity to serve as a basis for peace and our world. let us remember that this is a season of progress. for the first time in decades, libyans and voted for new leaders that were credible, competitive, and fair.
this democratic spirit has not been restricted to the arab world. over the past year, we have seen peaceful transitions of power in malawi and a new president in somalia. in burma, a president has freed political prisoners. a courageous decision has been elected to power and people look forward to further reform. around the globe, people are making their voices heard, insisting on their dignity and their right to determine their future. and yet, the turmoil of recent weeks reminds us that the path to democracy does not end with the casting of a ballot. nelson mandela once a said, to be free is not merely to cast off once a chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others.
[applause] true democracy demands of the citizens cannot be thrown in jail because of what they believe. and that businesses can be open without paying a bribe. it depends on the freedom of citizens to speak their minds and assemble without fear. and on the rule of law and due process that guarantees the rights of all people. in other words, a true democracy, real freedom is hard work. ose in power have to resist the temptation to crack down on dissidents. in hard economic times, countries must be tempted -- may be tempted to rally the people around perceived enemies at home and abroad, rather than focusing on the pain-staking work of reform. moreover, there will always be those who reject human progress.
dictators to cling to power. corrupt interests that depend on the status quo. and extremists who fanned the flames of hate and division. from northern ireland to south asia. from africa to the americas. from the balkans to the pacific rim, we have witnessed the convulsions that can accompany transitions to a new political order. at the time, the conflicts arise along the fault lines of race or tribe and often they arise from the difficulties of reconciling tradition and faith with the diversity and independence of the modern world. in every country, there are those who find different religious beliefs threatening. in every culture, those who love of freedom for themselves must ask themselves, how much they are willing to tolerate freedom for others.
that is what we saw a play out in the last two weeks in the crude and disgusting -- when a crude and a disgusting video sparked outrage brought the muslim world. i have made it clear that the united states government had nothing to do with this video. i believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. if it is an insult not only to muslims, but to america as well. for as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race. we are home to muslims who worship across our country. we not only respect the freedom of religion, we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe. we understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them. i know that there are some who
ask, why don't we just banned such a video? the answer is enshrined in our laws. our constitution protects the right to practice free-speech. from the united states, countless publications provoke offense. like me, the majority of americans are christians and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs. as president of our country, and commander in chief of our military, i accept that people are going to calm the awful things every day. [laughter] and i will always defend their right to do so. [applause] americans have fought and died around the globe to protect people who express all views, even views we profoundly
disagree with. we do not do so because we support hateful speech, but because our founders understood that without such protections, the capacity of each individual to express their own views and their own fate may be threatened. faith may be a stak threatened. we do so because given the power of a faith in our lives, the religious differences can enflame. if the strongest weapon against hateful speech is not repression, it is more speech. the voices of tolerance that rally against bigotry and a blasphemy. understanding and mutu respect. i know that not all countries in this body shared this particular understanding of the protection of a free speech. we recognize that.
but in 2012, at a time when anyone with a cell phone can spread offense of abuse around the world with a click of a button, the notion that we can control the flow of information is obsolete. the question, then, is, how do we respond? on this, we must agree. there is no speech that justifies mindless of violence. [applause] there are no words that excuse the killing of innocents. there is no video that justifies the attack. there is no slander that provides an excuse for people to burn a restaurant in lebanon or destroyed a school or cause death and destruction in pakistani. -- in pakistan.
in this modern world, where modern technology, for us to respond to that hateful speech and powers and the individual who engages in such a speech to create chaos around the world. we empower the worst of us if that is how we respond. more broadly, the advance of the last two weeks also speak to the need for all of us to honestly and then -- to address the tensions between the west and the arab world which is moving toward democracy. let me be clear. just as we cannot solve every problem in the world, the united states has not and will not seek to dictate the outcome of democratic transitions abroad. we do not expect other nations to agree with us on every issue. nor do we assume that the violence of the past weeks or the hateful speech by some individuals represent the views of the overwhelming majority of
muslims. any more than the views of the people who produced these -- who produced this video represent the views of america. however, i do believe that it is the obligation of all leaders in all countries to speak out forcefully against violence and extremism. [applause] it is time to marginalize those who, even when not directly resorting to violence, if use hatred of america or the west or israel as the central organizing principle of politics. for that only gives cover and sometimes makes an excuse for those who do resort to violence. that brand of politics, one that pits east against west and south against north, moslems against christian and hindus against jews cannot deliver on the promise of freedom -- muslims
against christians, and hindus against jews, can't deliver the promise of freedom. to the youth, it provides a false hope. burning an american flag does nothing to provide an education. smashing apart a restaurant does not fill an empty stomach. attacking an embassy will not create a single job. that brand of politics only makes it harder to achieve what we must do together -- educating our children and creaking opportunities they deserve. protecting human rights and extending -- and creating opportunities they deserve. protecting human rights. america will never retreat from the world. we will bring justice to those who hurt our friends and we will stand with our allies. if we are willing to partner with countries around the world in deeper trade, investment in science and technology, development, all efforts that can spark economic growth for
all of our people. such efforts depend on a spirit of mutual interest and mutual respect. no government or company, no school will be confident working in a country where it's people are endangered. four partnerships to be affective, our citizens must be secured and our efforts must be welcomed. a politics based only on anchor, one based on dividing the world between us and -- based only on anchor, one based on dividing the world between us and them, if it ultimately undermines those who tolerate it. all of us have an interest in standing up to those forces. let us remember that muslims have suffered the most at the hands of extremism. on the same day our civilians were killed and benghazi, -- in
benghazi a turkish police officer was killed days before his wedding. several afghan children were more by their parents just days after they were killed by a suicide bomber in cobble. -- in kabul. it may initially be focused on the west, but over time its cannot be contained. -- it cannot be contained. the same impulses of extremism is used to justify war between tribes and clans. it leaves not the strength -- it leads not to strength and prosperity but to chaos. in less than two years we have seen people protesting bring more change to muslim countries than a decade of violence. the extremists understand this. they have nothing to offer to improve the lives of people, so violence is the only way for
them to stay relevant. they do not build -- they only destroyed. it is time to leave the call of a violence, and the politics of division behind. on so many issues we face a choice between the promise of the future or the presence of the past. we cannot afford to get it wrong. -- or the prisons of the past. we cannot afford to get it wrong. america stands willing to help all. the future must not belong to those who darted christians in egypt. it must belong to those who chanted in the square, "muslims and christians, we are one." eight months not be shared by men who bully women, but by girls who go to school -- it must not be shaped by men who
policewomen, but by girls who go to school. [applause] the future must not belong to those corrupt few who still a country's resources, but business and men who seek prosperity for all people. those are the men who america stand with. theirs is the vision we will support. the future must not belong to those who slandered the profit of islam, but to be credible, those who contend that slender must also condemned the hate we see in the images of jesus christ that are desecrated for churches that are destroyed. or the holocaust that is denied. [applause] let us condemn incitement against muslims and pilgrims. it is time to keep the words of
gandhi -- intolerance is itself a form of a violence and an obstacle of growth to the true democratic spirit. [applause] together, we must work toward a world where we are strengthened by our differences and not a defined by them. that is what america embodies. that is the vision we will support. among israelis and palestinians, the future must not belong to those who turn their backs on the process. let us leave behind those who thrive on conflict. those who reject the right of israel to exist. the road is hard, but the destination is clear -- a secure, if the jewish state of israel and an independent and prosperous palestine. [applause] understanding that such a peace must come through a just agreement between the parties, america will walk along and we
are prepared to make that journey. in syria, the future was not belong to a dictator who massacres his people. if there is a cost to cries out for protests in the world today, peaceful protests, a regime that tortures children and shoots rockets at the apartment buildings. we must remain engaged to ensure that what began was citizens demanding their rights does not end in of violence. -- in of violence. we must stand for those who believe in a different vision. inclusive spirit were children do not need to fear their own government and all syrians have a say in how our government. at that is what america stands for. that is the outcome that we will work for with sanctions and consequences for those who persecute and assistance and support for those who work for this common good.
because we believe that the syrians who embrace this vision will have the strength and legitimacy to lead. in iran, we see where the path of a violent and unaccountable ideology leads. the iranian people have a remarkable and ancient history. and many iranians switched to enjoy peace and prosperity alongside their neighbors. but just as it restricts the rights, the iranian government props up a dictator in a damascus and supports terrorist groups abroad. time and again, it has failed to take the opportunity to demonstrate that its nuclear program is peaceful and meet its obligations to the united nations. so, let me be clear. america wants to resolve this through diplomacy and we believe there is still time and space to do so. but that time is not unlimited.
we respect the right of nations to access nuclear power, but what are the purposes -- one of the purposes of united nations is to see that we harness the power for peace. if make no mistake, a nuclear- arms iran is not a power that can be contained. it would threaten israel, security of nations, and the stability of a global i economy. it risks triggering a nuclear arms race in the region and an unraveling of the treaty. that is quite a coalition of countries is holding the iranian government accountable. that is why the united states will do what we must to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. we know from painful experience that the path to security and prosperity does not lie outside the boundaries of international law and respect for human rights. that is why this institution was established from the level of conflict.
that is why liberty trapped over tyranny in the cold war. that is the lesson of the last two decades as well. history shows that peace and progress come to those who make the right choices. nations in every part of the world have travelled this difficult path. europe, the bloodiest battle of the 20th century is united, free, and at peace. from 0 to south africa, from turkey to south korea, from india to indonesia, if people of different races and traditions have lifted millions out of poverty while respecting the rights of their citizens and meeting their responsibilities of nations. it is because of the progress that i have witnessed in my own lifetime, the progress that i have witnessed after nearly four years as president that i remain ever hopeful about the world that we live in.
the war in iraq is over. american troops have come home. we have begun a transition in afghanistan. america and our allies will end our war on schedule in 2014. al qaeda has been weakened and osama bin laden is no more. and nations have come together to lock down nuclear materials. america and russia is reducing our materials. we have seen choices made. -- choices made to put more power in the hands of citizens. in a time of economic challenge, the world has come together to run prosperity. 20, we have kept countries on the path to recovery. america has assumed an agenda that feels growth and a dependency and worked with african leaders to help them
feed their nations. new partnerships has been forced to corrupt corruption and promote government that is open and transparent. new commitments have been made to ensure that women can pursue opportunity. later today, i will discuss our efforts to combat human trafficking. all of these things give me hope. but what gives me the most hope is not the actions of us, not to the actions of leaders, it is the people that i have seen. the american troops who have risked their lives and sacrificed their limbs for strangers have a world away. the students who are eager -- were eager to use their knowledge to benefit mankind. the faces in a square in prague for a parliament that see democracy giving a voice to their aspirations. the young people and the schools
whose eyes shine with promise. these men, women, and children of every race and a faith remind me that for every angry mob that it's shown on television, there are billions around the world who share similar hopes and dreams. they tell us that there is a common heart beat to humanity. so much attention in our world turns to what divides us. that is what we see on the news. that is what consumes our political debates. but when you strip away people everywhere, they long to return to their destiny. the comfort that comes with faith. the justice that exists when governments to serve their people and not the other way around. the united states of america will always stand up for these aspirations for our own people
and for people all across the world. that was our founding purpose. that is what our history shows. that is what chris stevens worked for throughout his life. and i promise you this. long after the killers are brought to justice, chris stevens legacy will live on in the lives that he touched. and the tens of thousands who marched against of violence through the streets of benghazi. and the libyans who change their facebook code to one of chris and the signs that read simply, "chris stevens was a friend to all libyans." they should give us hope. they should remind us that so long as we work for it, justice will be done. history is on our side and that a rising tide of liberty will never be reversed. thank you very much. [applause]
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] he >> we will give you another chance to see president obama's speech to the united nations tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. after that at 8:00 thursday, mitt romney spoke today at the global initiative in new york about foreign aid and the attack in benghazi, libya. the first debate between presidential candidates mitt romney and barack obama is next wednesday, october 3. the news hours moderates. watch and engage with c-span
followed by the domestic policy debate at 9:00. post-debate, your reactions and comments. a follow our live coverage on c- span. and online at c-span.org. >> earlier today, three former pentagon officials who serve in the obama administration talked about the world of national security in the presidential election. this is an hour. >> we're going to go ahead and get started. people will be straggling in. you are encouraged to help yourself to food or whenever you need. in the co-founder and senior vice president of a third way. on behalf of my colleagues,
somewhere, national security program, welcome. before i handed over to bill, i had just a couple of things i wanted to talk about relating to our work on national security. as mitt romney discovered on september 11 of this year, nothing has the power to shake up a presidential race like a change in a national security. that can be an external event as we had in libya or is to be a political mistake. i learned that the hard way when i was a junior campaign staffer working for mike dukakis. i was there at the moment when he was climbing into that tank. i am here to tell you that you can shake up the race all kinds of ways off when it comes to national security. if he back then, in 1988, democrats are in the middle of a 30-year, 35-point deficit when
it came to vote for trust on national security. that security gap began in the aftermath of the vietnam war and persisted very stubbornly until about 2008 when it closed up, due mostly to republican mistakes. the voters were tired of the iraq war. tired of the blundering that they have perceived in the bush administration. they decided that both parties, there was kind of a pop in both houses. what has been very interesting, and a third way has been attracting -- tracking the national security with our own focus groups for the last several years, if you look at this slide, that is the security gap. if you extended out to the left, it gets all wide and absolutely consistent going envoy back to 1972. but you can see where it closed up in 2007, 2008 and because of
the iraq or. and now it is close up again. the interesting thing about that is it is at 0 because we have a president who is had an enormously successful off first- term when it comes to national security. if we did focus groups on this in -- with swing voters in ohio and florida earlier this year. even voters disinclined to support the president, people who were planning to vote for mitt romney could not name a single thing that they were willing to criticize president obama on when it comes to national security. they view his record as a very solid. they all said the same thing. if he got us out of iraq. he got bin laden. he did all the things you expect them to say that he did. however, there is still some skepticism about democrats as a party on national security. some of the same old questions
of the voters had it came up again this year. for when it comes to obama, they believe he has done an enormously good job on this. while the president is well- position on these issues, democrats still have some work to do often and we will continue to be tracking these issues and updating our work as years go on. let me now turn over to build. he will introduce our guests and get right to it. >> the chart that you see is also in your newsletter. you have your own personal copy. you also have the monthly newsletter that we put together here at the third way. that news letter deals with some other subjects. not just national security. the main topic is the rather surprising fact that barack obama has developed, believe it or not, populist appeal. he is not by nature a populist, nor is mitt romney. i call obama the elite of
education and romney the elite of wealth. when it comes to the personal appeal to voters, obama is clearly ahead right now as you can see from the figures. if you look at the job approval ratings, for the latest ratings on page two all are 15% or higher, which is a clear threshold for president was running for reelection. on the back page, you'll find the latest senate rankings were democrats have picked up some momentum. today we're talking about national security and in about an hour, a little over, the president will be addressing the united nations. this could not be a timely your -- more timely. we have three guests from the obama administration. critical of all had positions on the obama administration. if i believe you are all on the advisory committee for the reelection campaign. if so, you are political as well as foreign policy experts.
i will introduce them one at a time. as i introduce them, i will put a question to each of them in his or her area of expertise. and then, having done that, we will open it up to questions from you. first, i will start with a doug wilson who has served as the assistant secretary of defense for public affairs from 2009 to 2012. he is a distinguished fellow of media and public affairs at george washington university. let me ask you this. it relates to the chart we just saw. why, for the first time in a generation, to voters prefer democrats to republicans on foreign policies? is that the elimination of osama bin laden or is there more to it? >> i think it is both. if this administration and democrats have basically proven to be of things. for one, that we can be tough.
the president can and will be tough standing up for american interests abroad. off but that he would do this in a smart way. i think people are neither left- wing or right-wing in this country when it comes to national security. they want this country to be safe and secure. they want us to engage in a smart way. we do not want us to be a theological and beat our chests and run off of a cliff. i think this president has shown that not just in terms of the death of osama bin laden, but in terms of the decimation of the leadership of outside. what i would characterize as one of the best and strongest relationships between the military and intelligence community that we have seen. a very affective cooperation in battlefields abroad. and also of effective partnerships. i think this present has treated partners with respect and with
trust. they have reciprocated in kind. i think from libya to the sanctions on iran to the battlefield in afghanistan, we have more partners working with us more effectively than we had before. i want to say one final thing and that is this. i think we also can be proud of the fact that over the last four years, the democrats have built an affective bench. we have, i think, a team of people now who are represented in terms of generation and in terms of talent and experience that we never had before. we are sitting in the offices of a third way. it is one of the groups that have been very effective in developing that. so has the truman project. so as the national security network. so has the conference is that brought together military civilian political think-tank experts to talk about china,
india, and the middle east of the last several years. consequently, when this administration took office, people knew each other. i do not think usc the illogical and backbiting and fights you have seen out of the republicans -- i do not think you have seen the video logical and backbiting and fight to have seen that the republicans. >> there were a number that came out of the clinton administration, but there have been more. i think we've seen a generation of development in the bench. some people who did not serve in the clinton administration are serving in senior positions here. i think they are smart and understand how to play as a team and how to listen and they get along with each other. i think, in part, you do not versus e right wingers obverse the nationalists. yet a generation whose views have been formed by the
realities of the 20th century. that is an reflected not just an of president obama but the team that supports him. >> the way i like to put it is president obama has the appeal of a reluctant warrior, which is what most americans are. if we have to go to war, we will. he has shown he will use force when necessary, but he is a reluctant warrior. a reluctant warrior is still a warrior. other presidents have been eager warriors. >> i would add the word engaged. if i think this president understands that in this world you need to be engaged and he is engaged smartly. >> ok. next, i want to introduce michelle. she served as undersecretary of defense for policy from february 2009 to february of this year. prior to her confirmation, she helped lead president obama's transition team at the department of defense. in 2007, she co-founded the organization that doug just referred to. the non-partisan think tank,
center for a new american security. republican states like virginia, notably, are using the intended sequesters up against their democratic opponents, even though the republicans were part of the deal. i want to ask you, how serious should we take this and is there anything democrats can do in response? >> i think we do have to be worried about the prospect of sequestration not only because it would impose additional cuts across the board, but to the mindless way in which the cuts would be imposed. it is across the board cuts. no opportunity to protect priorities. choose for your point to except. -- choose where you are going to accept. it would be devastated across the board. we do have to remember where this came from.
sequestration was put into the budget control act as a threat, as the hanging over the heads of the members of congress to ensure that they would reach a pragmatic compromise, come to the table, gets to a budget to, and move this country forward. i think it is a little bit rich that summer republicans are trying to make this a political issue, given that they also voted to cut for putting sequestration in as a forcing function if you get to a budget deal. you have to also -- you know, where president obama has tried to do on defense when given the budget control act and the new parameters of having to find $487 billion in cuts over four years, if he took a strategy- driven approach. if he went back to the drawing board to rethink the strategy. he did that with the military leadership of the partners. off with the civilian leadership of the department, laid out a
clear priority, and then laid out his plans. what you hear on the other side of his opponent, mitt romney, is an equally mindless call for a dramatic increases in defense spending, of to a very arbitrary level, 4% of gdp without any strategy behind it, without any spending plan behind it if in terms of, how are we going to pay for that? if he articulate, if you're saying no new revenue should be on the table. if you're going to increase defense spending by trillions of dollars without a strategy and was no willingness, you will put it you did you look at every aspect of the federal budget, which to me is mindless as sequestration would be. >> we have a couple interesting poll such a point out. one is that veterans who are almost always for the republican candidate do favor mitt romney in this election. is that correct, by about nine points?
>> 12. >> 20. 20 points. that is about the size it has been in the past? ok. veterans are disproportionately not entirely men. every poll that i have seen shows men favoring mitt romney. by another poll, a different direction. this is a group i have reported on -- nascar fans. nascar fans favor obama by about seven points, which is quite remarkable if you ever spent, as i have come a weekend at a nascar track. that is remarkable. so, there is some very mixed pictures here of those constituencies. colin served as a deputy of the defense from the middle east from 2009 to 2011. he is with the new americans security and the professor in the securities program at georgetown university.
well, and my question to you is this. in light of the events in egypt and libya, how can the administration to defend its response to the arab spring? >> i think if you look back to the president's cairo speech in the summer of 2009, for what he said was the united states had an interest but the people in the region had an interest in moving towards a more just, accountable, representative government. we saw that movement. the demand for political change started in the late 2010 and spread elsewhere in the region. i think the president was right in understanding the importance and debt of the right side of history and supporting these movements. this is something our republican friends i think to understand -- we did not start this thing. the arab spring was started by millions of everyday citizens in the arab world taking to the streets to demand the same
freedoms that americans enjoy. the president had the foresight to recognize that it was imperative to get on the right side of that conversation. at the arc of history was bending toward greater freedom in that part of the world and that we had to support it. now, at the same time, you recognize that we had to stand for universal set of principles in this context. individuals should not engage in violence and should be free from -- the have universal rights and that governments in the region had a responsibility to move toward political and economic reforms because it was clear that this was the only way towards long-term stability. at the same time, i think the president recognized that there is not a one size fits all policy for each of these country. each country had to be taken on s